Quote:
Originally Posted by raaaid
youre trowing random facts again and trying to apply the autority criteria in your favour
|
Nothing of what I've said is random in any way, shape or form. If you doubt me, go look it up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by raaaid
what of this statements is false?
statement number 1:
the f16 stick has an extreamly short run
|
Not false. What
YOU fail to recognize, however, is that the 1/4th of an inch of travel on the stick is
deadband. Nothing happens inside that 1/4th of an inch, AT ALL. Once you reach the limit of that 1/4th of an inch, where the stick doesn't move anymore, THEN the flight-control system starts translating the
FORCE (basically the weight you put on the stick) you input into control-surface deflection, which again makes the aircraft roll/pitch.
Quote:
Originally Posted by raaaid
statement number 2:
a high or low sensitivity depends on the stick run
|
Which is
NOT true for the F16's stick.
Quote:
Originally Posted by raaaid
statement number 3:
the f16 has a short run which it implies it has high sensitivity
|
Which again is
NOT true, because the travel of the stick has absolutely nothing to do with the maneuvering of the aircraft what so ever. Again, when you reach the
LIMIT of that travel, the
WEIGHT (i.e. force) you put on the stick is what defines how large the effect on the controlsurfaces will be. High weight (i.e. pulling hard on the stick) equals a faster and higher response from the aircraft.
Quote:
Originally Posted by raaaid
edit:
your making a sophism in your point:
the control is based on the force
oh yeah to move it farther you have to apply more force
then so its a 109 stick based on the force to move it farther you have to apply more force
a sophism
|
You're comparing a wire-and-pulley system to a computer-controlled system. You might as well compare a squirrel and a pig. They're both mammals, but that's where the comparison ends.
Why is this so hard for you to grasp? Either you're being a deliberate troll, or you're as intelligent as my right shoe.